In re Anderson CA2/3, B232746A

Anderson, a physician, was convicted by jury of continuous sexual abuse of a child under 14 and Lewd Acts with a child; the conviction was affirmed on appeal in People v. Anderson, 208 Cal.App.4th 851 (2012).
Anderson filed a habeas petition claiming ineffective assistance of counsel to challenge the admissibility and authentication of a secretly recorded library-confrontation between Anderson and the victim, Y., and sought an evidentiary hearing.
The trial record showed Y. confronted Anderson at a library, the conversation was recorded, and the defense sought to challenge post-confrontation conduct as evidence.
The defense argued the recording had authentication issues, potential alterations, and missing initial portions, and that defense counsel failed to investigate indicia of alteration.
The court denied the habeas petition, discharged the order to show cause, and held the record supported authentication, rejected prejudice from alleged omissions, and found no need for an evidentiary hearing.
The decision followed our rehearing order and added a footnote; the primary claim remained unpersuasive under Strickland v. Washington and related authorities.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether counsel’s performance was deficient for failing to challenge the recording’s authentication	Anderson asserts time disparity and missing portion show manipulation	People contends the recording was authentic and defense could not show material alteration	No; authentication supported by Y.’s testimony and Ebert’s procedures; no ineffective assistance
Whether defense counsel rendered ineffective assistance by failing to protect Anderson’s right to testify	Anderson should have testified to missing early portion to explain the recording	Court limited testimony; strategic choice within wide discretion	No; trial court’s rulings and strategic choices were reasonable
Whether Anderson’s due process rights were violated by potential alterations to the recording	Alleged anomalies suggest manipulation to undermine defense	Anomalies insufficient to show material alteration; harmless given corroboration	No; combined evidence and testimony fairly authenticated the recording
Whether the lack of disclosure about recording equipment fell within admissibility constraints	Defense needed equipment data to challenge authenticity	Official information privilege limited disclosure; not reversible error	No; evidence admitted as secondary but properly authenticated

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. Supreme Court 1984) (ineffective assistance standard requires deficient performance and prejudice)
Rock v. Arkansas, 483 U.S. 44 (U.S. Supreme Court 1987) (right to testify and credibility issues at issue in habeas petition)
People v. Collins, 49 Cal.4th 175 (Cal. 2010) (prosecutorial/defense evidentiary behavior standards in habeas context)
People v. Morris, 53 Cal.3d 152 (Cal. 1991) (authentication effectiveness of witnesses; document admissibility facts)
Jazayeri v. Mao, 174 Cal.App.4th 301 (Cal. App. 2009) (weight of evidence vs admissibility in authentication)